Deserving of Darts? Jeff Fortenberry On Repealing Health Care

Typically the GiN “Deserving of Darts” feature articles lay out an issue and an assertion is made that some individual is indeed - deserving of a hail of darts. In this instance, I submit to you, the Nebraska citizen, tax payer, and voter, the decision regarding whether or not Nebraska's First District Congressman, Jeff Fortenberry, is deserving of darts for recent remarks about repealing the health care law.

Representative Fortenberry appeared on the Thursday, October 28, "Drive Time Lincoln" KLIN radio show. The context of the interview is important. The show's host Coby Mach, started Rep. Fortenberry's interview with a reference to an interview he'd done with Iowa Congressman Steve King several days earlier (click HERE to listen).

In noting priorities for an upcoming Congress, Rep. King stated:

The necessity to repeal Obamacare. It just must be repealed, every single vestige of it. There's no accommodation with this thing that can allow the -- Nancy Pelosi or anyone else, to let's just say, just repeal the most egregious aspects of it. No, it's just all got to go.

Then, Coby Mach replied:

Congressman, when I have state senators -- or uh -- Congressmen on this program, the feeling, though, is that there really is no chance of repealing Obamacare. Do you feel that there is a chance?

Rep. King:

Well, yes! Who ARE these people? There's all kinds of chances to repeal Obamacare. One of the things that could defeat us is pessimism and I can lay out the path to do this. All we have to do is stand up and say I'll stand up with you on this and we will get it done.

Rep. King went on in more detail about the steps that should be taken to ultimately repeal the law, fully acknowledging that President Obama would, of course, veto a repeal measure, but efforts cannot and should not stop there. The important point is to de-fund the law's implementation and keep pushing on the issue through 2012. The whole effort should not end until there's an election of a presidential candidate who pledges that their first act would be to sign a measure repealing the health care law.

If this unwavering position were to be adopted by all Congressmen, I would not be nearly as skeptical as I am about what a Republican majority in either or both the House or Senate would do once they take office in January.

My skepticism comes from a study of history, but many recent events do not enhance my outlook. At the top of the list is Fortenberry's shape-shifting on the 10/28 local radio show (click HERE[1. If you prefer not to download either of the audio files referenced here, go to THIS KLIN page and scroll through the list of archived shows for the Fortenberry and King interviews.] to listen to the full interview, HERE to view a full transcript online, or HERE to download to your computer.). In response to Coby Mach's report that Rep. King believed the health care law could be repealed, Rep. Fortenberry replied:

I think that would be a high hurdle to cross. I think the more likely scenario is that you are going to have a continued aggressive debate in the House about funding or not funding certain aspects of the implementation of this new health care law. And I think the reality of simply saying, “Hey, we need to start over. Here's a better way to do it,” would be cleaner and preferable, and that would be what I'd like to see. But, in reality, the numbers won't be there for that type of cleaner process. Instead, you're going to probably, again, have a major fight, gridlock, over how to implement the plan, and there will be funding source fights, and that will block certain aspects of it.

Even more importantly, Fortenberrywent on to make clear he likes some of the aspects that are being implemented and noted that reversal would be difficult and "perhaps, inappropriate".

Now, again, there's certain aspects of this reform that are already being implemented and that are helping fill some of the gaps -- the brokenness in the health care market, and that would be very difficult to reverse and, perhaps, inappropriate. But packaged in a new health care reform that achieved more affordable access and options for small business and individuals and opened up competition, rather than stifling competition, and further focused on health and wellness to reduce costs, would be my preferred scenario. But we'll have to see.

Fortenberry refers to "reasonable reforms". Just what parts of Obamacare does Fortenberry consider reasonable?

There are some things that are being implemented right now, some reasonable reforms, such as allowing children to stay on their parents' policies up to 26. That's a reform that I would support as it brings new people into the health insurance pool. Taking caps off existing policies is important to certain families who are afflicted by very high cost conditions, such as hemophilia. And, by having insurance caps, it doesn't save the system any money; it just forces families to move to (sic) job to job. So, those are some reasonable things there.

There are a number of problems with Rep. Fortenberry's position on these recently implemented requirements, not the least of which is ballooning costs. Of course, a number of the new requirements sound wonderful. The trouble is someone has to pay for them. It seems Rep. Fortenberry has overlooked the fact that insurance companies are businesses and businesses need to make money. Insurance companies cannot afford to stay in business and provide the required coverage without dramatically raising rates.

During the period of debate over the bill, opponents expressed concerns about the dramatic rate increases that would follow and, for some companies, the new requirements would mean that they would simply get out of the business of offering health care policies altogether. Another serious concern is that the rate increases would cause employers to stop offering health care coverage to their employees. In addition to these very practical problems, opponents expressed concerns that imposing very costly requirements on insurers was actually a back-channel means of moving towards a single-payer system.

I have further concerns about Rep. Fortenberry's expressed desire that government become "further focused on health and wellness to reduce costs". Health and wellness is a wonderful thing, I just wonder what government's got to do with it. Fortenberry is the Chair of the House's Nutrition Sub-Committee. I am puzzled about why federal government even has such a committee and I wonder what that committee or the Congressman thinks it should do about focusing on my or any other American's health and wellness. Will it use government's powers to incentivize my personal conduct? In a world where government can dictate the contents of an insurance policy and impose a mandate to purchase insurance, it also seems conceivable that government would try to tell me what to eat and how to live, all in the name of promoting my health, of course.

Rep. Fortenberry talked about retaining parts of the law that he considered reasonable and arguing about whether or not to fund the remainder. Only tinkering with pieces of it means we will very likely miss many aspects of what is wrong with it, considering it's length and complexity. I'm with Rep. King on this subject:

I'll repeat Rep. King's reaction to Congressmen who state repealing the health care law is impossible:

Well yes! Who ARE these people? There's all kinds of chances to repeal Obamacare. One of the things that could defeat us is pessimism...

It's up to the people of Nebraska to determine the answer to the original question: Is Congressman Fortenberry deserving of darts for his position on repealing the law?

I, for one, firmly believe Rep. Fortenberry is deserving of a barrage of darts for never once mentioning the individual mandate included in this health care law. As one of his constituents, I am disturbed this unprecedented liberty grab doesn't seem to bother the Congressman. It is a stark example of the fallout when elected officials lose sight of basic principles. If Rep. Fortenberry recognized the basic principle that it is unconstitutional for the government to require citizens to make a purchase, his course of action would be clear. There are few who disagree; the entire law rests on the individual mandate, it must stay in place or the whole scheme, dependent upon forcing everyone into the risk pool, collapses.

Comments

Shelli, Of course I support Fortenberry as our pro-life endorsed incumbent in his re-election bid. However I agree completely with you about demanding of not only Cong. Fortenberry but our other four GOP Congressional Delegation that Obamacare be repealed. I was upset that the GOP Senators did not muster a filibuster against Kagan’s confirmation. This is similar for me. It’s a watershed moment in history. These people to whom we are giving a mandate need to band together and beat policies that a majority of Americans (and Nebraskans) reject.

I support Congressman Fortenberry’s re-election as the Neb Right to Life PAC endorsed candidate. However, I agree with your assessment here that we must demand of the four of our GOP Congressional Delegation that Obamacare be repealed. No namby-pamby beating around the bush here. I have to agree with Congres…sman Steve King (R-IA) here. Similar to the Republicans not filibustering Kagan. Just band together and do it. You’re getting your mandate tonight!

Julie,
Thanks for once again taking time to read one of articles. I appreciate your persistence in regards to leaving a comment considering the confusion you must have experienced. Fortunately, the next time you visit, your comment will automatically appear. You may recall that our site went completely down at the end of September when our web hosting service was attacked. Since we had to rebuild the entire site from scratch after moving to a more secure service, it was like starting all over, so for anyone leaving a comment, it was is if they had never done so before. Now you’re all set!

I appreciate your perspective on this whole subject and I agree that a very loud mandate has been given to many elected officials as of last night and they need to carry through with the promises they’ve made and just as you say, band together to beat the policies that the majority of Americans (and Nebraskans) reject.

Like you, I was upset when the GOP Senators did not mount a filibuster against Kagan. I felt the same about Sotomayor and actually on several other occasions. This has been one of the frustrating things for those of us observing over time; Republicans don’t seem to grab their spines. It is precisely as you say here as well – no namby-pamby beating around the bush!

I wholeheartedly agree, we are at a watershed moment in history. If these folks don’t do what you and I can see clearly needs to be done this time around, I really wonder if there will be a next time. Part of a quote Linda shared in our article today seems quite appropriate:

“The job is ours and the job must be done. If not by us, who? If not now, when?“

Thank you again, as always, for taking the time to come to the site and to share your perspective with us. Those of us who see these issues clearly need do need to band together.

The Congressman clearly supports scaling back the overreach of the Obama administration and the Democrat Congress. As he said last night, yesterday’s election was a wave against the system and a call to get our fiscal house in order. I trust he will help lead that effort including the repeal of ObamaCare.

Dan,
Thank you for taking the time to come to the site and to make comment. It does pain me, however, to have to point out an inherent contradiction in your remarks. In your first sentence you note that the Congressman “clearly supports scaling back the overreach of the Obama administration” and then in your conclusion you mention “repeal of Obamacare“.

But that is precisely the point we are making. There is a vast difference between scaling back and repealing the health care law. The scaling back approach is neither acceptable nor feasible.

I am glad that you trust Congressman Fortenberry to lead the effort to repeal the health care law because I, for one, do not. If I might be so bold, I recommend that you listen to the interview again and perhaps read the transcript. You seem to be hearing things that are not there.

If you’re referencing leadership here, the only real leadership reference in the interview is a question asked by Coby Mach of the Congressman about whether he is prepared to lead the charge to get our fiscal house in order. Rather than answering with a firm “yes”, Rep. Fortenberry actually noted that he believe he’s been part of that all along, going on to give an example of what he calls a difficult vote on a bill to cut the budget by $25 billion. If he found the push back on that so difficult, how difficult is he going to find the push back on the exponentially larger and absolutely necessary cuts that must be made now?

Further, will it be possible to put our fiscal house in order if we leave in place even the parts of the health care law that Fortenberry says are reasonable and inappropriate to reverse? I doubt it.

Rep. Fortenberry’s response to Coby Mach’s question implies a voting record in the House of Representatives that demonstrates leadership in the area of fiscal responsibility, however, an examination of that record reveals very much the opposite. If you are truly interested in a pursuit of the truth, I encourage you to return here in the next couple of days to read an article we are working on which examines Rep. Fortenberry’s voting record, particularly as pertains directly to spending.

Again, thank you so much for coming to the site and taking time to make comment,

I sent an email to Sen. Nelson yesterday letting him know that we expect him to vote to repeal Obamacare. He told me in a response email he “would not support repeal.” Let’s toss this joker out of our seat.